1. Weekly Endowment Updates - @kpk + @Steakhouse
- Endowment overview for the week.
- Endomwnt at $95M
- 64% in eth and 36% in stables
- Rebalancing to start this week
- Net realized APR is above 2%
- Weekly commentary
2. [Temp Check] SPP3: Program Authorization and Committee Model
- The proposal went live yesterday after discussions on the forum - it is up for a vote.
- The program will have a $3.4M budget compared to last year.
- A committee will be used instead of the DAO to select the SPs.
- Key Changes to the Draft
- Milestones clarified as targets, not gates.
- Term limits removed to only talk about SPP3.
- Added a 200k floor for minimum application size.
- Submission review window extended 2 weeks based on feedback.
- Requirement for a mid-cycle update in Q4 and an end-of-cycle review.
- Clarified language on conflict of interest statements.
- Added a small note on the service agreement, which will be posted when the submission period opens.
- The service agreement is to cover the DAO and the provider, preventing OFAC sanctions violations or legal issues.
- The DAO lacks a hierarchy or official positions, leading to reliance on individuals like Coltron to proactively push things forward.
- Question: How can the DAO incentivize action and ensure functionality without formal leadership?
- MetaGov Working Group
- There are questions about the roles, expectations, and obligations of working groups.
- MetaGov has been trying to serve delegates and proposers and not trying to influence over the process too much.
- Challenges include bandwidth, neutrality, and defining the scope of work.
3. Steward Election
- There are questions about whether current stewards should continue serving.
- The ENS retro proposal is in a weird state, complicating the election timeline.
- Delaying elections was intended to inform decisions about WG structure.
- There is a proposal to restructure the working group structure, creating confusion about nominations.
- The DAO entrusted MetaGov to move the needle forward.
- Suggestions for moving forward
- Metagov should facilitate the process in a structured way so that every proposal gets feedback and keeps moving forward.
- It is suggested that Netto speak for Metagov and make a decision so the stewards and community can move forward, despite any personal discomfort
- June 1st is a soft deadline for deciding on the future of working groups.
- The proposal from Fireeyes is currently a “temp check” and lacks sufficient feedback.
- There is a need for a strong, structured proposal to move forward with WGs.
- Metagov should facilitate putting the proposal to a vote, fulfilling the commitment to do so.
- The question is whether to continue the current pause of working groups or move forward.
- A yes/no vote from the DAO could determine whether to continue working groups or not.
- Stewards need clarity on whether they should continue their current activities and if they will be compensated.
4. Open discussion
- The ENS Retro Final Draft from metagov.org includes a roadmap and a proposal for a governance advisor to help implement it.
- Suggested a more simplistic and easily implementable plan, rather than a process-focused approach that may not be adapted to the ecosystem’s needs.
- Suggested June 30th as the date for steward nominations and elections, winding down the other 2 working groups in the interim.
- A Google Doc will be drafted and shared for feedback.
- The goal is to publish it by the end of the week to commit to a date and have a decision by the next call.